MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1879969392 · doi:10.1155/2010/618953

Methicillin‐Resistant <i>Staphylococcus aureus</i> Endocarditis and de Novo Development of Daptomycin Resistance during Therapy

2010· article· en· W1879969392 on OpenAlexaffabout
Loreto Twele, E. Moyen, Kunyan Zhang, B. Dalton, Deirdre L. Church, John Conly

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Infectious Diseases and Medical Microbiology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntimicrobial Resistance in Staphylococcus
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health ServicesUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDaptomycinStaphylococcus aureusEndocarditisMedicineMethicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureusMicrobiologyStaphylococcal infectionsInternal medicineBiologyVancomycinBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Daptomycin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus has been previously reported, but the development of resistance while on therapy with subsequent clinical failure for endocarditis has been infrequently reported. A case of persistent methicillin-resistant S aureus (MRSA) bacteremia in the setting of right-sided endocarditis in a 38-year-old man with a history of intravenous drug use is presented. He developed de novo resistance to daptomycin during therapy after several courses of antibiotics, with subsequent clinical failure. Isolates were identified by molecular characterization to be community-acquired MRSA 10 (USA300). To the authors' knowledge, the present case was the first in Canada to involve the de novo development of daptomycin resistance with clinical failure due to MRSA during therapy for endocarditis. Clinicians and microbiologists must be aware of this phenomenon given the implications for treatment and transmission of the strain. It also raises questions regarding the use of daptomycin in settings of heavily pretreated patients with persistent MRSA bacteremia.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.739
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.233 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Infectious Diseases and Medical MicrobiologySame topicAntimicrobial Resistance in StaphylococcusFrench-language works237,207